Introduction — a small taste of the Middle Ages
Imagine the dusty, buttery tang of parchment, the soft press of a seal like a stamp of identity, and people arguing — not with social media but by petition, seal and map. These five documents are our recipes: each ingredient tells a story about disputes and agreements in medieval England. We will savour their shapes, words and marks to understand who had power, who complained, and how differences were settled.
How to use this printable lesson
- Work through Sources 1–5. Read the short questions, then check the model answers beneath each source.
- Complete a short written response (approx. 150–250 words) comparing two documents — suggested pair: Ravenser Odd (Source 1) and the Inclesmore map (Source 5).
- Teachers: see the five unique 100-word comments (one per source) and the extended rubric at the end.
Source 1 — Ravenser Odd (court case, 1291)
Student prompts (brief): Describe the shape of the document. Find names. Why did Grimsby sue Ravenser Odd? What did each side claim? How did the court decide?
Model answer (concise)
The document is a narrow parchment roll or strip typical of plea-roll entries: compact lines of writing laid out in columns for official court summaries. It names the parties as the people (burgesses) of Grimsby and the people of Ravenser Odd rather than lengthy lists of individuals. The people of Grimsby went to court because Ravenser Odd’s inhabitants were drawing away trade, allegedly arresting merchants and forcing them to trade at the island, which harmed Grimsby’s trade and tax income. Ravenser Odd replied that merchants willingly traded there because it offered better prices and accused Grimsby of swindling. The King’s Bench dismissed Grimsby’s complaint, finding no breach of the king’s peace, and fined Grimsby for making a false claim; Grimsby would likely have been unhappy with the result.
Short classroom activity
Discuss: Why might the royal court be uninterested in a local trade dispute? (Consider taxation, royal peace and central priorities.)
Teacher comment (100 words)
Well done exploring the Ravenser Odd court case. You carefully described the unusual long thin parchment and identified the parties, and you linked the dispute to competition over trade and harbour rights. To deepen your analysis, consider the court’s priorities: why might a royal court dismiss a local commercial complaint? Think about power, taxation and the king’s interest in order. Also, reflect on bias in the record: the plea roll records the crown’s view more than ordinary townspeople’s feelings. For next steps, compare this verdict with later petitions to spot patterns in who succeeds before the king and why not?
Source 2 — Matilda Passelewe (charter roll, 1267)
Student prompts: Find Matilda’s name. What is granted? What is a ‘free warren’? Why keep a roll of charters?
Model answer (concise)
Matilda Passelewe’s name appears in the margin. The charter grants her the right to hold a weekly market and an annual fair at her manor (Barewe, Suffolk) and grants her ‘liberam warrenam’ — a free warren. A free warren is an exclusive right to hunt and take small game (hares, rabbits, some birds) on her land; large game was usually reserved for the king. The chancery kept an official roll (an office copy) so there was a permanent record to prove rights and to settle any disputes if someone later denied the grant.
Short classroom activity
Compare the marginal name and the main text: how does marginalia help find entries in long rolls?
Teacher comment (100 words)
You found Matilda Passelewe’s name and the grant of market, fair and free warren—excellent. Consider how charters show royal favour and the importance of written records kept in the chancery. Ask why the king issued such grants: was it for revenue, loyalty, or local order? Notice the Latin formulae and marginal notation—these are clues to formal process and archival practice. To extend, compare this charter roll copy with an original sealed charter: what changes in authority or authenticity do you see? Finally, explore the social effect: how would weekly markets and hunting rights change daily life in Matilda’s manor locally.
Source 3 — Middelburg petition (merchants to the king, 1426)
Student prompts: What language is the petition in? How does it differ from other sources? What did the merchants want? What might have happened next?
Model answer (concise)
The petition is written in Latin (the common administrative language), though it may contain names or terms from other languages. Unlike the docket-style court entry or an official charter, the petition is a complaint sent up to the king asking for intervention. The English merchants complained that, despite having letters of safe conduct from Middelburg officials, certain merchants were arrested, imprisoned and forced to hand over keys and goods. They asked the king to write to Middelburg to secure the return of their property and enforce the safe conduct. The king could respond by issuing letters demanding restitution, ordering diplomatic pressure, or advising legal proceedings; to find out what happened next, you would search chancery correspondence, the king’s letters patent or subsequent plea rolls for replies or enforcement actions.
Short classroom activity
Plan: find two sources (e.g., letters of safe conduct and subsequent royal replies) that would corroborate the merchants’ story.
Teacher comment (100 words)
Good work reading the Middelburg petition and noticing it is written in Latin or possibly Anglo-Norman — careful observation. You described merchant complaints about arrests, seizure of goods and ignored safe-conduct letters. To improve, trace the petition’s path: how would such a plea reach the king and what remedies could he offer? Think about international trade networks and diplomatic limits in the 15th century. Also consider evidence: what other documents (letters of safe conduct, port records, or Dutch municipal rolls) might confirm the merchants’ claims? Challenge yourself to propose a research plan to locate these corroborating sources and predict likely outcomes.
Source 4 — Receipt from Ermengarda (Exchequer receipt)
Student prompts: What is a receipt used for? How much money? Who else is named? Find ‘ego’. Describe the seal.
Model answer (concise)
The receipt functions as proof that money was paid to the treasury — the same basic purpose receipts serve today. Ermengarda received or paid one sterling mark (recorded in the Exchequer entry). The document names Exchequer officers and uses ‘ego’ to introduce the payer (‘I, Ermengarda’), so you can find her name. The document is authenticated with her red oval seal showing what appears to be a portrait of a woman in widow’s clothing (a veil). She likely chose this image to assert her personal identity and status — possibly to show she was acting as a widow in her own right and not merely through a husband.
Short classroom activity
Design a modern seal or signature for yourself that shows identity and authority; explain your choices in one paragraph.
Teacher comment (100 words)
Nice attention to the receipt’s function and Ermengarda’s seal. You identified the payment amount and linked the presence of ‘ego’ to her identity—well done. Now ask about gender and legal agency: how unusual was a woman negotiating with the royal treasury and using her own seal? Analyze the visual choices on her oval seal and what widow’s dress signalled about status and authority. Consider why receipts mattered for financial accountability in the Exchequer. For extension, compare this receipt to other Exchequer entries: are women commonly recorded? Use the archives to quantify female presence in financial records and explain further significance.
Source 5 — Map: Abbot of St Mary’s, York (Inclesmore / 1407)
Student prompts: Find features (rivers, bridges, crosses). Why so colourful? Shape and orientation. Languages on the map. How did the map settle disputes?
Model answer (concise)
The colourful map shows rivers, riverbanks, streams, paths, plants, towns, churches, bridges and houses — all drawn as readable features. It is colourful to make ownership boundaries and features easy to see at a table, where participants physically consulted it during negotiations. Its shape is designed to be laid flat on a table: words face different directions because users stood around it; the map is therefore a pragmatic, functional rectangle or sheet rather than a north-up modern atlas. The map uses Latin labels and English place-names; English words like ‘Stone cros’ and local toponyms appear so readers involved in the dispute could recognise places. The map recorded an agreement about peat-cutting and grazing: specific boundary crosses show shared and divided rights (one-third Duchy, two-thirds Abbey). Compared with modern maps it’s less to scale, more symbolic and legal — its main purpose was to record an enforceable agreement. Many town names survive today, though the landscape (moorland, rivers) may have changed due to drainage, development and erosion.
Short classroom activity
Compare the medieval map to a modern map of Goole/Thorne Moor: list three continuing place-names and three changes in land use.
Teacher comment (100 words)
You carefully explored the Inclesmore map and what it records about peat cutting, grazing rights and boundary markers. Strong observation of colour, crosses and multilingual labels. To deepen your historical reasoning, interpret why maps were so valuable as dispute-settling tools—visual, public and durable — and how their orientation (words in different directions) fits their use as table-maps. Compare place-names with modern maps to note continuity and change in landscape and settlement. Extend by considering audience: who commissioned the map, and whose interests does it protect? Finally, evaluate reliability: how might cartographic choices obscure contested claims? Propose three specific follow-up research questions.
ACARA v9 Curriculum connections (student-friendly)
This lesson supports Australian Curriculum (v9) History outcomes for middle secondary learners (Year 8–9):
- Historical Knowledge & Understanding — study of medieval society, economy and culture (feudal relationships, towns and trade, role of monarchy and Church).
- Historical Skills — sourcing and analysing primary documents, placing events in chronological context, explaining cause and consequence and assessing reliability and bias.
- Inquiry & Communication — constructing evidence-based explanations and communicating findings clearly.
Extended rubric (use for assessment)
Assessing students’ written responses to the documents. Two outcome levels shown: Exemplary and Proficient. Use the rubric alongside classwork and teacher comments above.
Exemplary (A range)
- Source analysis: Offers insightful, nuanced interpretation of at least three sources. Identifies language, form, function and audience. Explains how documents reflect power, status and legal process.
- Evidence & Explanation: Uses precise quotations or detailed references to documents. Connects evidence to well-developed argument about agreement/disagreement and resolution.
- Context & Synthesis: Places documents in broader medieval context (royal administration, Exchequer, chancery, trade networks). Compares documents to draw conclusions about who could seek royal help and when.
- Communication: Clear, well-structured response (300–500 words), correct historical terms and accurate use of dating conventions (regnal years). Few to no factual errors.
Proficient (B–C range)
- Source analysis: Identifies main purpose and key features of two or more documents. Notes language and main claims of parties involved.
- Evidence & Explanation: Refers to relevant parts of documents to support explanations, but analysis is more descriptive than analytical at times.
- Context & Synthesis: Provides a reasonable contextual explanation (e.g., role of charters, petitions and receipts) and compares documents with some interpretation.
- Communication: Clear structure (200–350 words) with appropriate vocabulary. Minor inaccuracies may occur but do not undermine overall understanding.
Suggested assessment task (printable)
Write a comparative answer (150–250 words) that explains how two of the documents show different ways of resolving disputes in the Middle Ages. Choose one legal/court record (Source 1 or a plea roll) and one administrative/visual record (Source 2 charter or Source 5 map). Use at least two direct references to the documents and explain who benefited from each outcome. Mark against the rubric above.
Further reading & archive-search tips
- Search The National Archives catalogue for plea rolls (King’s Bench), Charter Rolls and Exchequer receipts to find parallel cases and compare outcomes.
- Look for letters patent or chancery rolls to trace royal replies to petitions.
- For maps, compare an archival image to a modern Ordnance Survey layer or Google Maps to spot continuity in place-names.
If you want, I can produce a printable one-page worksheet (PDF-style HTML) based on this lesson, with space for students to write answers, or create extension questions tailored to your class. Say the word and I’ll plate it up, warm and ready.